Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/01/16
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Bob, So you are saying that I should run out and spend about $2500 for a small increase in performance? Steve Annapolis - ---------- >From: FIGLIO4CAP@aol.com >To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us >Subject: Re: [Leica] Gandy vs. Puts >Date: Sun, Jan 16, 2000, 5:08 PM > >In a message dated 01/16/2000 3:32:59 PM Eastern Standard Time, >icommag@toad.net writes: > ><< So, while Erwin is probably right about > scientific testing I doubt that it really means much to the vast majority of > photographers. > >Huh?? It is absolutely essential for me, both intellectually and in practice. > My God, man just compare the images of the old 35mm Summilux to the new >(ASPH) version. If you do not see the difference we must be on different >planets. But for me the numbers have to be right and Erwin's measurements set >the baseline. There is a srrong correlation between what the measurements say >and the quality of the image in technical terms. > > Yes, I like to have lenses that give me excellent results, > but, I still belief that content is more important. >> > >For me the craft is part of the content and a poor lens can only diminish the >impact of the content. Otherwise, why strive for quality. Who needs a Strad? >Why pay more for a Steinway? What difference does a Leica lens make? > >Bob Figlio >